Piranha 3-D

Lots of Sex, Nudity, Violence and Gore....Just The Way Old B-Movie Horror Movies Used To Be Like...

Does anyone ever remember going to the drive-in, and watching those old lame B-level horror movies that used to play there? You know the ones that showed a lot of gratuitous nudity and sex, to go with the gore wrenching violence? Well I don't, as I wasn't even born yet. However, I have heard stories about it, and I've watched a few of those films in the past myself, on T.V. Anyway, for those yearning for those type of horror movies again, then look no further than "Piranha 3-D." It has everything you'd expect out of a B-movie. Lots of violence and horror. Plus, a lot of freaking nudity and sex scenes too...literally! In fact, there's a lesbian sex underwater scene in this film (involving the two hot girls you'll see in the pictures I provided), and not to mention a man's floating dismembered p***s flowing around in the water until a piranha eats and gags it out. Indeed, "Piranha 3-D" breathes new life into the B-movie horror genre, by making a film so horrendously bad, that most critics are saying it actually turned out good. However, does that make "Piranha 3-D" a good movie by any means?

Well before I get to that, I'll briefly explain what this film is about. After a sudden underwater tremor sets free scores of the prehistoric
man-eating fish, an unlikely group of strangers must band together to
stop themselves from becoming fish food for the area's new razor-toothed
residents. Sadly, that's easier said than done, as it's spring break and all the stupid dumb a**es...I mean teenagers don't want to listen to the old sheriff, when she kindly asks them to vacate the water for their own safety. No, they don't listen to her until like I don't know...say like around twenty or more of them get eaten by those things. Then that's when they start to listen to her. Damn morons. Why are teens in B-movies so freaking ignorant and stupid? Seriously, if I had a son or daughter that freaking dumb, I'd hang myself for raising such a stupid kid. Plus, let's not forget about the possible sequel, as Christopher Loyd's character, Mr. Goodman, says those are only the baby piranhas.....(as the adult ones aren't in this movie)

To be quite honest, it's hard for me to judge a B-movie. Simply because it's almost like the director and writers of this film intentionally make it so horrendously bad, that it doesn't expect you to take it at all seriously. Even the death scenes were made rather comical along, with some of the cheesiest dialogue you can think of in this movie. In one scene a ten year old girl says, "Hey, I like your boobs. My brother would love them too." Kids say the darndest things don't they? Plus, lets not forget the friendly little exchange of how the little girl says she doesn't like wearing her training bra because it's itchy, to a porn actress. And the porn actress retorts, "I know right", in total agreement. Gee, talk about female bonding here folks. Yeah, I'm starting to wonder if the writers for this film wrote the dialogue that bad intentionally or not.

However, one of the main criteria I use to review films is the director(s) and writer(s) intent. What exactly were they trying to do with the film, and what message, if any, was it trying to convey. Once, I decipher that, a film review becomes fairly easy for me to analyze, as I then just start to question how successfully they executed that said intent and possible message. On that end, I can definitely tell "Piranha 3-D" was made out to be a true B-movie in every sense of the word. It was almost like the director and writers knew that this was nothing more than a cheap remake of an original movie that was already an obvious rip off of "Jaws", that they conveniently decided to make "Piranha 3-D" the cheesiest horror film ever. Thus, making a horror film so freaking bad, that it turns out quite decent. Does it work? Almost...but not quite, as there was a lot unnecessary scenes that could have been taken out.

Unfortunately for "Piranha 3-D", I do factor in something else besides director(s) and writer(s) intent. I also factor in how much of what kind of content is necessary to carry out said intent. Which is something that "Piranha 3-D" fails in tragically, as there was a lot things that could have been edited out. One being the the floating p***s that was eaten and gagged out by a piranha. Seriously, how was that freaking necessary? We already saw the guy get torn apart by those things, so was it really necessary to see his thing like that? I don't think so, as it doesn't do anything for the story.

Plus, there's the various sex and nudity in this film (most of it being naked girls). Don't get me wrong, I love looking at a naked hot girl as much as the next guy out there. However, when it comes to movies, I often find nude and/or sex scenes often distasteful and unwarranted. As most nude and sex scenes add almost nothing to the story of a movie. Besides, if I wanted to watch a film to look at a hot girl and for the sex scenes, then I'd go out and rent a porno. Not that I ever have, but I would if that was my only intention of watching a movie. As for the five minute lesbian underwater make out scene, doesn't add anything to the movie, but it rather distracts from the main storyline itself. Besides, when has a sex scene ever been necessary in a movie? In "Gone With The Wind", we all knew Clark Gable and Vivian Leigh's characters had sex around the ending of the movie, but they never showed it. Why? Because the set up and story line was so ingeniously clever that the audience already knew they had sex without actually seeing it. Alas, it seems writers of this generation must think we're all morons or something, as they must think that unless we see sex take place, then it never happened. Gee, what a great logical way to think. Does that mean since you never saw your parents have sex, then that must mean they're still....(gasps)...virgins! For those that can't tell, I was being sarcastic with my last remark.

To get back at the topic at hand, I thought "Piranha 3-D" does execute fairly well on being a horrendously bad B-movie, but the unnecessary gratuitous nude and sex scenes pretty much ruined this movie for me, as a lot of it just distracted from the central story line. In fact, the five minutes that was spent on the freaking underwater lesbian make out scene, it could have gone to develop the romance between the two main characters, Jake (Steven R. McQueen) and Kelly (Jessica Szohr), of the film. Instead, very little if any screen time is ever given to develop their love story, as writers pretty much just expect you to root for them because...well they're the good guys! Gee, great plan. Again, I'm being sarcastic.

If that wasn't bad enough, the 3-D images aren't even that great either. As I could barely even notice it, outside of a few scenes. And one of those scenes, I wish it didn't work so well in...namely the floating p***s scene....yeah...that's not exactly what I want to see in a 3-D movie. Having said that though, I thought the CGI was fairly well done, as the piranhas are very realistic in this movie.

Overall, I'd have to give this film a one and a half out of four. It had a lot of promise being a great B-movie that was so freakishly bad that it turns out good like "Berry Gordy's The Last Dragon", for instance, but too much sex and nude scenes ruin the film for me. Hence, the low score. Sure, it'll be a great rental for you and your friends to make fun of on how horrible it truly is. I just wouldn't expect anything more out of it than that....

Don't worry baby. Only the lame extras and supporting cast ever dies in these type of movies

You talking to me? You talking to me? Well, there's nobody else here, so you must be talking to me.

HELP! My career has gone down the tubes, since "Sliders", and now I'm having to make stupid movies like this!

We told those kids to stay out of the damn water, what do they do? They jump right back in the damn water. Dumb a**es!

Man, I wish I could be a porn director, so I can drink taquila and lick salt off a girl like her.

Comments

No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

sending

Author

Steven Escareno 6 years ago

Well you might be right about that, as I told Steve Lensman that I might've been too hard on this movie in hindsight. However, I do appreciate you taking the time to share your thoughts with us, as I always enjoy hearing other people's perspective on various films.

My take on CGI is essentially I expect them to be consistent and good throughout a movie. Depending on when the film is released, I try to compare it to films that have been released around that time, or prior to it. Hence, why I would never dismiss the original "King Kong" movie for it's dated effects, as they were revolutionary to the time period. However, if the effects are inconsistent or shoddy in comparison to films that were released before or during it's time frame, then I'd probably end up marking that off the film's overall rating.

Unfortunately, films like "Independence Day" for instance will try to use special effects to cover up a half a** written cliched story. In those cases, I do give a lot of credit to special effects if they're that impressive like "Independence Day", but I do mark off for not coming up with a decent story; hence it kind of balances out to some degree. I don't know if that's what you were referring to. However, in general, I just expect the special effects to be consistent, and used to enhance a story rather than distract from how dull the movie actually is if you catch my drift.

However if you're asking about my opinion of the puppeteering and cgi for this particular film, then I'd have to say I didn't have any quarells with the special effects at all. If anything, I thought the special effects were done rather well for this movie. Anyway, I hope that answers your question.

Annonymous 6 years ago

I completely agree with everything you have stated. Again I would like to appologize for my earlier comments as they were pretty one sided you are an excelent movie reviewer I just felt you over emphasised some aspects of the movie that strictly did not apeal to you such as the nude sex scenes which I felt compeled to rebutle. Granted the more and more questions I pose I get a greater sense that you are very knowledgeable and well equiped to review any movie to it's undeniable potential~Annonymous

Annonymous 6 years ago

One more question I would like to touch base on if I may, what is your take on CGI? Do you think that animatronics and puppeteering were executed properly to have a visual impact?take Jurrasic Park for example which I believe in all 3 movies both are portrayed. Thanks~Annonymous

Author

Steven Escareno 6 years ago

As I said before, every genre is judged differently, as it would be kind of absurd to judge something like "Finding Nemo" to something along the lines of "Pulp Fiction." It just wouldn't add up, as they're clearly as different as night and day. Do I focus my reviews purely on the cinematography aspect? To be honest, I don't think anyone would really get that from reading my reviews, as I rarely ever mention cinematography unless it's either that damn good, awful, or it just adds something unique to the story.

As I said before, it's a bit more complicated than you might think; which is why it often takes me almost a whole day to write a film review, as there's a bit of a process to it. Unlike most film critics that solely base film reviews off their opinions, I try to analyze who the target consumer is first and foremost. Get inside their head, and try to think of what they may like about this movie. Then I analyze the director and writer's intent. from there, i decipher how well the film carries out said intent, as I try to review all film's from inside the target audiences perspective as well as the casual movie goer that might not fall into that target audience.

Although I do carry different sets of criterias for each genre, the one consistent thing that I do look for is story and character development. Granted, the story doesn't have to be complex, but the main characters have to likable enough on some level. Those two criterias are the only two consistent factors I look for in all genres, as each genre has a different set of standards.

Do I factor in surprise twists? It really depends on the twist, and how well it fits into the context of the story. If the twist is done cleverly, then chances are I'll write a great review on it (i.e. Sixth Sense). However, if the twist turns out to be moronically stupid that makes absolutely no sense, then more than likely it'll be lucky to even earn a decent rating from me (i.e. Secret of Nimh 2).

Fond memories factor? It really depends on the film to be quite honest, as i try to never allow the emotional factor of any film get to me like some critics do. The reason being is that some bad movies will often try to hide a rancid story and piss poor dialogue by heavily emphasizing on the emotional factor. However, if the lead up to the emotional moment is genuine, un-rushed, and heartfelt, then it does get factored in. If it's rushed, forced, and downright awkward, then chances are it might still count, but not in a good way towards my review.

Would I agree that some directors turn anything they touch into instant gold? It would depend on your definition of that, as I do believe some directors are better at their craft than others. However, whenever I judge a movie, I try to judge each film based on it's own merit. Meaning, I won't automatically go in with any preconceived ideas of how great or bad a film will be just because it has a particular director handling it. After all, take a look at George Lucas. He directed great films like "American Grafitti" and "Star Wars: A New Hope", yet he also directed such trash like the "Star Wars Prequel trilogy." Or take a look at John Hughes, he directed great films like "The Breakfast Club", "Weird Science", and "Ferris Bueller's Day Off"; while also writing screenplays for such films like the earlier National Lampoon Vacation movies, and "Home Alone." Yet, if you look at his resume closely, he also had a hand in the abomination that was the remake of "Miracle On 34th Street" and "Dennis the Menace", to name a few.

Or Akiva Goldsman, he helped write the screen play for "Batman & Robin", yet he also helped make great films like "Cinderella Man." Therefore, I try not to prejudge movies before seeing them. Sure, I may write preview articles sometimes where I analyze how well a film will do before even seeing it or before it's released. But when i walk into a theater, or watch a movie at home, I clear my mind of all preconceived notions of what to expect, and allow the movie to carry itself on it's own merit; with no prejudgments about it because of it being directed by a certain person.

As for what my take is on subtitled or dubbed movies, I prefer subtitled, as a lot of times dubbed films will often take away from a story rather than enhance it, as a lot of times the dubbed voices are so bad that it's distracting. No, I prefer subtitles myself, as it allows you to view the film as it was originally intended if that makes sense.

as for for the other films you mentioned like "Pan's Labyrinth" and "tremors", I haven't seen those films yet, but I have heard a lot of great things about them. Unfortunately, since I'm kind of obligated to put the new releases ahead of older films on my priority list, I haven't gotten a chance to check it out yet. Apparently readers like reading about new movies versus old ones, so what can you do? lol. Anyway, I hope that answers your question though, as it was interesting gaining more input on your opinion on films.

Annonymous 6 years ago

In this aspect I would have to agree. How does one gauge what qualities dictate a favorite movie? Do you base it solely on cinnematography aspect? Do you focus on plot and character development? Do you factor in "surprise twists"? Or even just movies that instantly bring back fond memories? Would you agree that some directors turn anything they touch into instant gold? What is your take on foreign subtiledvor dubbed films?one that stands above the rest to me personally would be Pan's Labyrinth the Guillermo del Toro version (not David Bowie lol). At the same time movies that I can't help but smile at are the tremors movies I know they would more than likely fall into your B movie category but they hit the mark for a good B movie in my eyes. Well if you have any input or response I'd like to hear. Thanks for your time ~Annonymous

Author

Steven Escareno 6 years ago

@anonymous

It would depend on which genre of films we're talking about, as I don't judge all genres the same exact way. I kind of have a unique set of criterias that i use for each genre. Are we talking about b-movies specifically? Or just in general?

What about you though? Which films do you typically like? Anyway, I apologize if it seemed like I was angry in my earlier response, as that wasn't my intention. However, I kind of got the notion that maybe you felt that way from reading your replies to me, so I hope you didn't take any of my responses personally.

@steve lensman

lol. Steve, what does religion have anything to do with this movie? First of all, just because a guy says there's too much sex in a movie, it doesn't make him overly religious. No, it just means that there's too much sex scenes in the movie that it detracts from the central story arc. Steve, I can't speak for all guys, but I usually watch movies for the stories. Don't get me wrong, I certainly don't expect "shakespearian" work to be done on every movie, but I do expect a decent story along with a great supporting cast of characters. Sure, the story can have over the top acting and elements, but it has to be done right in an entertaining way.

Besides, if I wanted to watch a film purely to look at hot girls, then I'd rather just rent porn or look it up online, and cut out the middle man. I'm just saying. Besides, most sex and nude scenes often don't add anything to the story content of films anyway. Sure, there might be a few that find ways to portray erotic fantasy portrayal of sex and nudity in an artistic way like "Eyes Wide Shut" and "Watchmen", to name a few. However, most of them are often contrived, and unnecessary. Of course, that's just me. lol.

Don't get me wrong, I get what you're saying, and I don't disagree that this film is obviously meant to be a throwback to the 70's exploitation of films; which in hindsight I guess you may have a point about me being overly critical of this movie. However, as I said earlier, I just find most sex and nude scenes often unnecessary to tell a story. If I wanted to see a naked girl having sex, then I'd sooner watch porn than this movie any day. lol.

Anyway, I guess we'll all have to agree to disagree. Thanks Steve for stopping by.

Steve Lensman 6 years agofrom London, England

Too much sex and nudity ruined the film for you? Wow. Steve you're not deeply religious are you? You did pick the wrong film to review. This film was a throwback to the exploitation films of the 70's and they all featured violence, sex and nudity.

I thought the film achieved it's aim at being a schlocky gory horror with laughs and hot girls in bikinis (and some wearing even less). :)

Looking forward to the sequel, Piranha 3DD.

Annonymous 6 years ago

My apologies for annoying you. Not my intent in fact I'm intrigued to ask if I may, is there a movie that stands above the rest to you? ~Annonymous

Author

Steven Escareno 6 years ago

Okay, i was going to say we'll have to agree to disagree on this, as I feel this is starting to verge on the edge of the ridiculous. Look Anonymous, I already explained everything that was wrong with this movie in my review. If you didn't understand it the first time, then please reread it again, as I really don't like having to repeat myself. It's nothing personal against you, but it's kind of a pet peeve that I have, as repeating something tends to annoy me. As you said before, opinions are like "a$$holes", everyone has them.

Besides, I think your missing the entire point of a review anyway. The point of a review is that your reading someone else's analyzation of a movie. Granted, you don't have to agree with it, but it gives you enough information about what the film is about; which allows you to decide whether or not you want to see the film, or at the very least, it'll give you insight what the critic has to say about it. Look, if you liked the movie, then kudos to you, as i honestly don't care either way. Seriously, the point of any film is that YOU liked the movie, so who cares what anyone else thinks? If you don't like my assessments of this film, then I say too bad. Get over it, as you haven't given me much reason to change my mind about it. Besides, it's just an opinion, so who cares?

Annonymous 6 years ago

Furthermore list all of the so-called "unnecessary" scenes from the movie and I will EXPLAIN the usefulness.~Annonymous

Annonymous 6 years ago

You have clearly misunderstood me as well friend. I don't want to argue or debate but I think you missed what I was trying to say as well. What kind of B movie would it without nude/sex scenes not to mention the fact it takes place during spring break! But as I say "opinions are like assholes everyone has one and they all stink" but sincerely I meant no offense to you either thank you for your input and you too have a nice day;-)~Annonymous

Author

Steven Escareno 6 years ago

Well first of all anonymous, thank you so much for stopping by, and sharing your insights with us.

Secondly, I can clearly tell that you did NOT understand a single word I wrote in this review. Look, I'm not saying it's you, as I probably didn't explained it too well. However, I NEVER compared this film to "Jaws", in any way. No, if you read what I actually said, I said that this film is a remake an old B-movie that was already an obvious rip off to "Jaws"; something even other film critics have cited out as well. From there, I never made any detailed analysis to compare this to "Jaws", as you're the only one here saying that. Please, don't misquote me again. Thanks.

Thirdly, all movies are designed to be a form of escapism on some form or another; which includes entertaining the audience. Besides, how many people do you know would watch a movie that they thought sucked over and over again? The point is all films are designed for entertainment purposes, so I fail to see how that makes any difference here.

Another thing here is you're implying that I think all films should have some sort of underlying message, then this only goes to show how you didn't understand my review at all. I mean no offense by saying that, but I'm merely stating an observation based on what you said to me.

If you had actually read my review, then you would've realized that I was merely stating some of the criterias I look for in films like what the writer(s) and director's intent are for said film. Sometimes writers and directors make movies with powerful underlying themes, while others just make movies that don't have messages at all, and they're made for pure entertainment value. If you had read my review, I never stated there was an intent by the writers and director to convey any kind of message. If anything, all I said was that it seemed the writers and director of this film wanted this movie to be so horrendously bad in B-movie fashion that it turned out to be good. That's all I said.

Look, I appreciate you stopping by to read my review, and offering your insights for us here, as I mean no ill offense. If I have offended you, then I apologize. However, I didn't misunderstand anything about this movie, as it's clear you didn't understand my review at all. Anyways, I'm sorry if I may sound a bit rude, as I can tell you that's not my intention. Thanks again for sharing you're input with us, and have a nice day. :)

Annonymous 6 years ago

Your missing the entire point of this movie which is for entertainment purposes only. Their does not have to be an underlying message or point to the story, just the story itself taken for what it is entertainment. As far as comparing this to a "Jaws" remake you clearly need to re-evaluate your movie knowledge. "Jaws" had numerous underlying messages if picked up on and their were no pointless scenes to the movie. If you watch when the young boy gets attacked at the beach you can actually see a real level portrayal of what witnessing a shark attack may actually be like. Something that I find is lacking in today's world of CGI animation. Just some friendly input~Annonymous

Author

Steven Escareno 7 years ago

That's cool. Yeah, I agree with you about 3-D. Although I've seen some great 3-D movies, there's also a lot of bad ones too. Personally, if a film has to solely rely on the 3-D aspect to be deemed good, then chances are the film really stinks outside of the 3-D effect. Anyways, i hope you enjoy the movie when you see it, and thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us.

Andy Webb 7 years ago

Like yourself I wasn’t around for the first run of real B-movies, or at least not old enough to watch them, and as such I actually want to see Piranha-3D. But as I find 3D a load of rubbish I will be waiting for the DVD release and it doesn’t surprise me when you say that the actual 3D was for the most unnoticeable as, as per usual it’s been used as a gimmick.

Author

Steven Escareno 7 years ago

@sognopiccolo

yeah, i think you have a great point about hollywood running out of ideas for movies. in fact, i was just reading the other day that someone is actually working a movie based on the freaking eight ball, you know the one that you ask questions to and shake. And they're also making a movie based on BATTLESHIP. The freaking board game. lol. Man, those films are going to stink.

Anyways, thanks for stopping by and for such a nice compliment. I don't know if my review was that good to be the official review of this movie. Although I do question why so many other film critics gave this film a lot of good reviews. Maybe they saw something about it, that i didn't. oh well. thanks again for stopping by. :)

@kumar b

Wow, it seems like you had the exact same opinion about this film as i did. I guess great minds think alike. lol. anyways, thanks for commenting and stopping by.

kumar b 7 years ago

I thought "Piranha 3-D" does execute fairly well on being a horrendously bad B-movie, but the unnecessary gratuitous nude and sex scenes pretty much ruined this movie for me

SognoPiccolo 7 years agofrom Wilmington, Ohio

I really do believe they missed the mark on this one... they should make your review the official review of the movie lol... I think they started running out of ideas for movies since they came out with phone booth or whatever it was called.

Author

Steven Escareno 7 years ago

lol. thanks paradise. im glad you liked the review. yeah, your right. this is a real dog of a movie. lol.

Paradise7 7 years agofrom Upstate New York

Great review (LMAO!). This is a real dog of a movie. Thanks for the tip...I'd miss this one, anyway, just the whole idea...

Author

Steven Escareno 7 years ago

Yeah, so did a lot of other people that went to see this movie. Heck, even I laughed at how horrendously bad this film was. However, it's a shame that it had too much unnecessary content, as it could have been a solid B-movie. Anyways, thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts with us.